VHGENGINE

by app.railway.up.engine-production-3bdc

getting_started

Read-only

The 5-step agent quickstart: modes, wait guidance, links. Free, no auth.

    Written to be parsed and acted on. Returns {what_this_is, five_steps, modes
    (cost + live latency + when to use), wait_guidance (expected_wait, estimates,
    progressToken, jobs), links}.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
No arguments

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`links`	No	Docs and endpoint links.
`modes`	No	One entry PER MODE (a list, not a map): {mode, base, per_hook, formula, p50_ms, p90_ms, latency_source, when_to_use}.
`evaluate`	No	How to judge output quality, including the public bake-off.
`payments`	No	Whether a top-up is needed and the exact available path. Private-beta customer pricing requires neither checkout nor top-up.
`webhooks`	No	How to receive job and low-balance events.
`five_steps`	No	The 5 ordered steps from nothing to hooks.
`memory_card`	No	A compact block worth persisting into your own memory.
`what_this_is`	No	One-paragraph description of the service.
`wait_guidance`	No	How to avoid blocking blind: expected_wait, progressToken, jobs.
`fleet_accounting`	No	How tags and per-key caps attribute spend across a fleet.
`response_shaping`	No	How verbosity changes what you get back.
`data_and_deletion`	No	Retention and what delete_account keeps.

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds 'Free, no auth' and details the exact return structure (what_this_is, five_steps, modes, wait_guidance, links). This provides behavioral context without contradicting annotations. It could mention rate limits or error behavior, but for a read-only quickstart, the disclosure is sufficient.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the purpose, the second outlines the return structure. Every sentence adds value—no fluff or repetition of the schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a zero-parameter quickstart tool, the description fully covers what it does, what it returns, and the access requirements (no auth). The output schema exists, but the description's breakdown of the return object is still useful and sufficient.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description focuses on the return value, which is appropriate. No additional parameter explanations are needed.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the tool as a '5-step agent quickstart' with specific content areas (modes, wait guidance, links). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on onboarding, and explicitly states what it returns. This is a specific, actionable purpose rather than a vague one.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies when to use the tool (for getting started and understanding modes/wait guidance), and it notes 'Free, no auth' to set expectations. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is clear enough for an agent to recognize this as the onboarding tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All VHGENGINE tools Inspect

Try in Browser

RayrunBuild, deploy, and operate MCP servers without becoming an infrastructure team.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Disambiguation5/5

Each tool targets a distinct resource and action, e.g., signup vs. delete_account, create_key vs. revoke_key, generate_hooks vs. score_hook. Even similar tools like generate_hooks and generate_hooks_batch are clearly differentiated by single vs. batch operation.

Naming Consistency5/5

All 32 tools use a consistent verb_noun snake_case pattern (e.g., add_credits, create_checkout, revoke_key, list_outcomes) with no mixing of camelCase or other conventions.

Tool Count4/5

32 tools is slightly above the typical 15-tool range, but the domain is broad (account, keys, webhooks, generation, scoring, jobs, outcomes), and each tool has a specific purpose. No tools seem redundant.

Completeness4/5

The tool surface covers most lifecycle operations: CRUD for accounts/keys/webhooks, generation/scoring with batch and async variants, outcomes reporting, and auxiliary tools. Missing explicit delete for hooks (expire automatically) and some update operations, but no critical gaps.

Resources

Need Help?